Charity Organizations

join us enabling the poorest of the poor toimprove their own lives

Wednesday, July 12, 2017

President
Maithripala Sirisena’s visit to meet with the Mahanayakes of the
Buddhist Sangha in Kandy may turn out to be the pivotal move in a
constitutional reform process. A week earlier they had publicly
announced in a joint statement that there was no need to bring in new
Constitution and that a new Constitution will create more conflicts in
the country. As the Buddhist clergy is very influential with the 70
percent who are Sinhalese Buddhist especially on issues pertaining to
identity, this threatened to be a major setback to the government’s
constitutional reform process. Whether it is in tackling the issues
connected with providing a facilitative environment for economic
development, taking action against corruption or dealing with post-war
accountability, the government has been faltering. It is unable to
deliver on what it has promised. This has enabled the opposition to take
the upper hand in the political debate.

At the last presidential and general elections held in 2015 all parties
promised some form of constitutional reform. At those elections Prime
Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and the UNP he leads were the most
specific about the constitutional reform that they proposed. They
specified a new constitution in which the executive presidential system,
the devolution of power and the electoral system would be changed. With
the change of government in 2015, it seemed that the new government
would take expedited action to both draft and implement the new
constitution. It passed a resolution in parliament that converted
parliament into a constitutional assembly. A 20 member steering
committee on constitutional reform was formed and which was headed by
the Prime Minister. Six parliamentary sub committees were also appointed
to prepare drafts of different sections of the new constitution.

The government also embarked upon a hitherto unprecedented process of
public consultations in order to obtain the views of the people on the
proposed reforms of the constitution. It appointed a 19 member Public
Representations Committee to hold consultations throughout the country
and ascertain the views of the people in order to submit them to the
drafters of the new constitution and also to parliament. This led to a
six month process of intense consultations that took place with
logistical support provided by governmental agencies. The committee then
came out with a balanced and fair report that gave the main themes or
headlines of public opinion on constitutional reform along with the
difference recommendations from civil society. However, the subsequent
failure of the government to launch a major educational and advocacy
campaign on the report has cost it dearly.

NON PARTICIPATORY

Unfortunately, the transparency with which the Public Representations
Committee met its obligations has not been matched by the rest of the
constitution drafting process. Technical committee reports were drafted
by experts with participation of the parliamentarians in the six
parliamentary sub committees. But members of those sub committees have
publicly complained that the process was outside their control and they
did not know what was being drafted and how they were being drafted. As a
result most of the parliamentarians who were members of the
constitutional assembly do not demonstrate a sense of ownership of the
constitution drafting process. This has enabled the opposition to take
the lead in going to the people and engaging in scaremongering without
being challenged by government members.

The President’s meeting with the Mahanayakes revealed that the absence
of ownership of the constitution making process extends beyond the
parliamentarians who have failed to champion the constitution reform
process. It includes the religious clergy and others in civil society.
In their meeting with the President the Buddhist prelates had complained
that the constitution being drafted by the government was in
collaboration with NGOs while it excluded them. However, most NGOs and
civil society groups also feel excluded from the constitution making
process. After they submitted their report members of the Public
Representations Committee do not appear to be playing a role in the
constitution making process either.

The JVP, although in the opposition, has been taking a constructive
approach to constitutional reform. JVP Parliamentarian Bimal Ratnayake
has observed that President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister
Ranil Wickremesinghe should have educated the Mahanayakes on this topic.
MP Ratnayake said the Buddhist prelates were influenced by facts and
figures presented by racist groups who assume the government would pass a
constitution harmful to the people of the country. The opposition has
been claiming that the government intends to divide the country in
accordance with the wishes of the Tamil Diaspora and the international
community. Recently both President Sirisena and Prime Minister
Wickremesinghe have been giving public assurances that the
constitutional reforms will not lead to the removal of Buddhism from its
foremost place in the constitution and that the unitary state would
remain intact.

PRESIDENT’S ROLE

During a nearly two-hour long discussion held between him and the
Mahanayaka Theras, in which a company of 22 bhikkhus were present with
the Mahanayakes, President Sirisena had reassured them that the draft
constitution would be shown to them prior to its presentation to
parliament and their views would be incorporated. He pledged that the
government will not bring any constitutional reforms that will undo the
country’s unitary state or the foremost place for Buddhism that is
provided in the constitution. The President also informed the
Mahanayakes that there has been no new constitution drafted yet and that
if there will be a draft constitution it will be presented to the
Mahanayakes and the leaders of the clergy of other religions for review
before it will go to parliament.

The role that President Sirisena has played in coping with the Buddhist
religious opposition to the constitutional reform process is indicative
of his importance to the government. The president’s political strength
lies in his ability to connect with the ethos of the Sinhalese majority.
It is this affinity that enables the president to be trusted by the
Buddhist prelates and by the majority Sinhalese population. On the other
hand, the president also needs to recognize that he was elected not
only by Sinhalese voters but also by Tamil and Muslim voters and he
needs to be the president of a multi ethnic, multi religious and plural
society.

At the present time the constitutional reform process is being driven by
the UNP component of the government that is headed by Prime Minister
Wickremesinghe who has announced his resolve to go ahead with a new
constitution. The prime minister has the wide learning and cosmopolitan
outlook to appreciate the constitutional mechanisms and compromises
needed to govern a multi ethnic multi religious and plural society.
President Sirisena’s committed support to take the message to the people
is necessary to get it accepted. What the president believes in, and is
prepared to speak up for, is likely to be accepted by the majority
community. It will also ensure the support of the SLFP group in
parliament that accepts his leadership. This is why the president is the
litmus test for political reform and why the president and prime
minister and their respective parties need to continue to work together
in the future rather than go their separate ways.